• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: 2020 Presidential Election part 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
Captain_Swoop said:
Bill Hemmer on Fox

“The anger out there in these red states is so deep and palpable that GOP legislators may have a difficult time seating Biden electors”

Fox News is laying that groundwork for Republicans to invalidate the election results and install Trump in office for another 4 years


I think I can dispense with the "install Trump in office for another 4 years". If it happens, he's President-For-Life or Emperor or whatever they decide to call him and there's no reason to ever have another presidential election again.
Click to expand...

pgwenthold said:
Why would "red states" be trying to seat Biden electors?

Let me say, for the record: red states, those states in which the majority voted for Trump, do not need to seat Biden electors.
Click to expand...

Pretty clearly referring to states with Republican Governors and/or Legislatures which Biden won anyway.

The concern, expressed for months now is that such states could decide to ignore the popular vote and appoint their own pro-Trump EC delegations. Or in states with Governors and Legislatures controlled by separate parties states could send two competing delegations, one from the Governor voting one way and one from the legislature voting the other way.

None of that would pass tight legal muster. Probably. We hope. Trump appointed a lot of judges.

Confuse and obfuscate, best way to destroy faith in Democracy.
 
Emily's Cat said:
I'm not so certain. They may not have claimed it to be fraudulent, but I give it good odds that they would be challenging the votes in pretty much the same way in any state that was close. It's a difference in tactic, not in strategy.
Click to expand...

Challenging votes is not at all the same as putting out a message that the election is rigged before a vote and then claiming it was fraudulent and you won after the vote and without evidence.

Challenging a close election is normal. This election isn't particularly close and what the GOP is doing is worse than requesting recounts. They are trying to sow doubt in the democratic process on a large scale for nothing more than political advantage.

If you want to counter that maybe they genuinely believe that the election was fraudulent (so it's not just political advantage but perceived righting of an injustice), that's fine. Fighting an injustice for which you have no basis aside from wishful thinking is almost as bad as fighting purely for selfish gain. Whatever their motive, they are trashing our democratic institutions to a degree that Democrats never have and there's no reason to believe Democrats would have behaved as badly this year had things gone otherwise.

It is a false equivalence you're suggesting here.
 
Emily's Cat said:
I thought I was pretty footloose about both of them.
Click to expand...

Not at all. You refused to accept that Trump is trying to steal an election because you aren't certain of his motives, but you're willing to guess that Democrats would have pursued the same means to overturning the vote had it gone differently.

In the latter situation, you're willing to draw a conclusion without evidence while in the former you're careful to stick to the known facts.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
That's an interesting take, much less stomach-cramping than thinking he was making it harder to evict himself from the WH.
Click to expand...

Well, it's some analyst's take, not mine. I'm willing to grasp it in both hands, though, even if it still sucks in its way.

ETA: I also doubt that the military would follow Trump in a White House coup. They don't like him that much, and for good reason.
 
Last edited:
phiwum said:
Not at all. You refused to accept that Trump is trying to steal an election because you aren't certain of his motives, but you're willing to guess that Democrats would have pursued the same means to overturning the vote had it gone differently.

In the latter situation, you're willing to draw a conclusion without evidence while in the former you're careful to stick to the known facts.
Click to expand...
And never mind that the Dems didn't play that game in 2016, instead EC relies on alt history to create false equivalence.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Bill Hemmer on Fox

“The anger out there in these red states is so deep and palpable that GOP legislators may have a difficult time seating Biden electors”

Fox News is laying that groundwork for Republicans to invalidate the election results and install Trump in office for another 4 years


I think I can dispense with the "install Trump in office for another 4 years". If it happens, he's President-For-Life or Emperor or whatever they decide to call him and there's no reason to ever have another presidential election again.
Click to expand...

I think Americans should install Trump in his own special room, and declare him the Forever King of the World. He'd get KFC, McDs, fresh nappies, and shots of lithium every day.
 
Trump narrows the margin

JOE BIDEN: 77,440,452

D TRUMP: 72,292,067

MARGIN OF VICTORY 5,148,385
 
crescent said:
Pretty clearly referring to states with Republican Governors and/or Legislatures which Biden won anyway.

The concern, expressed for months now is that such states could decide to ignore the popular vote and appoint their own pro-Trump EC delegations. Or in states with Governors and Legislatures controlled by separate parties states could send two competing delegations, one from the Governor voting one way and one from the legislature voting the other way.

None of that would pass tight legal muster. Probably. We hope. Trump appointed a lot of judges.

Confuse and obfuscate, best way to destroy faith in Democracy.
Click to expand...

To add to this: I expect soon we'll see GOP politicians expressing doubt in the speed of the courts. They'll say:

1. I don't think we can use the results of the election to appoint EC candidates until the courts tell us which votes we can use, or determine if there was voter fraud, or electoral worker misconduct.

2. I don't think the courts can adjudicate this in time! (Then they'll file more meaningless motions to drag the process out or start new cases).

3. So, we had better just appoint the EC delegation ourselves.

4. Then (if necessary) go with more blabbery about the false Democracy/Republic dichotomy as reason why the citizens of the rural areas of the state should have more say than the urban citizens. Toss out that urban representation and appoint delegates for Trump.

This is the kind of thing that shows how hopeless court cases can play into the bigger picture. Confuse and obfuscate, such that decisive action looks necessary when it comes. Democracy is messy, so make it even messier so that the cleaner alternative looks nice.

(Did I mention I used to live in a country with seriously deficient politicians? On par with doing this sort of thing. They ended up with a civil war. I see too many parallels here and now.)
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
According to Wikipedia, between 2000 and 2015 recounts only over-turned 3 state-wide election results out of 4687 total elections. The largest change in vote totals between the original count and the recount was less than 600 votes. Most of the vote count changes were attributed to improperly rejected absentee ballots. This means that the odds of a recount in Georgia overturning the result is EXTREMELY small.

Also according to Wikipedia, recounts in Arizona only happen if the vote totals are within 0.1%, meaning that a recount in Arizona is unlikely.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_recount

Apologies if someone has posted this already.
Click to expand...

According to Fair Vote, the largest change in a recount in a statewide election since 2000 was 0.107%. That election was for the Vermont State Auditor, and resulted in a swing of only 239 votes. The second largest change was 0.076%.
 
crescent said:
To add to this: I expect soon we'll see GOP politicians expressing doubt in the speed of the courts. They'll say:

1. I don't think we can use the results of the election to appoint EC candidates until the courts tell us which votes we can use, or determine if there was voter fraud, or electoral worker misconduct.

2. I don't think the courts can adjudicate this in time! (Then they'll file more meaningless motions to drag the process out or start new cases).

3. So, we had better just appoint the EC delegation ourselves.

4. Then (if necessary) go with more blabbery about the false Democracy/Republic dichotomy as reason why the citizens of the rural areas of the state should have more say than the urban citizens. Toss out that urban representation and appoint delegates for Trump.

This is the kind of thing that shows how hopeless court cases can play into the bigger picture. Confuse and obfuscate, such that decisive action looks necessary when it comes. Democracy is messy, so make it even messier so that the cleaner alternative looks nice.

(Did I mention I used to live in a country with seriously deficient politicians? On par with doing this sort of thing. They ended up with a civil war. I see too many parallels here and now.)
Click to expand...

I think the American electoral system is more sturdy than that. I don't think such a level of malfeasance would be tolerated. Just because one doesn't know what's going to happen doesn't mean the worst thing one can imagine will happen.

I think the deadlines will be met. If challenges hang on, then they will fall away in order for deadlines to be met. That is to say that a deadline will deal with what stands at that moment. States will certify and the EC will perform its duty. Call me an optimist, but I think any GOP BS and obfuscation will make no difference, and they know it.
 
eerok said:
I think Americans should install Trump in his own special room, and declare him the Forever King of the World. He'd get KFC, McDs, fresh nappies, and shots of lithium every day.
Click to expand...

Like Moriarty in STTNG
 
Emily's Cat said:
I am confused by this.

Most of the media outlets are suggesting that Trump fired a bunch of people and is installing other people into those roles.
Click to expand...

Yes he's fired those who he thought were obstructing him and put in partially qualified replacements.

The why is not yet clear.

It could be to do this (from a month ago):
Donald Trump has announced on Twitter that he wants to bring all US troops home from Afghanistan by Christmas – a plan that came as a surprise to administration officials and which puts complicated peace negotiations in jeopardy.
Click to expand...

or perhaps another missile strike against Iranian proxies.

Either would be a "look what I've achieved" moment and likely to leave a mess for someone else to clean up.
 
More fake news:
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Nearly 80% of Americans, including more than half of Republicans, recognize President-elect Joe Biden as the winner of the Nov. 3 election after most media organizations called the race for the Democrat based on his leads in critical battleground states, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll.
Click to expand...

Sad.
 
Trump crawled out of his basement today for a brief moment. Now he's back in the basement.
 
Biden increases margin further

JOE BIDEN: 77,475,613

D TRUMP: 72,303,658

MARGIN OF VICTORY 5,171,955
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom